Linked by Amjith Ramanujam on Mon 4th Aug 2008 14:35 UTC, submitted by Hakime
Graphics, User Interfaces "The best open source applications and operating systems are more usable now than they were then. But this is largely from slow incremental improvements, and low-level competition between projects and distributors. Major problems with the design process itself remain largely unfixed." Personal Note: I am not sure how many people feel that Free Software has poor usability. As far as the desktop environment, I find most of linux window managers to be the more user-friendly than Windows and OS X.
Thread beginning with comment 325510
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Agreed in part
by protomank on Mon 4th Aug 2008 15:34 UTC
protomank
Member since:
2006-08-03

Overall, I do not see much problems, but there is one BIG that is never fulfilled: consistency.
Basically you can have a mix of KDE, Gnome, Gtk, WXWindow and other apps. Now try saving or opening a file in each of those. All will come with a differente file dialog. The file dialog should be a task of the desktop environment, not the application.
If you give openoffice, kate and gedit for a newbie, he will have a lot of problems figuring how each file dialog works and why they are so different. :-P

Reply Score: 1

RE: Agreed in part
by Laurence on Mon 4th Aug 2008 15:40 in reply to "Agreed in part"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Overall, I do not see much problems, but there is one BIG that is never fulfilled: consistency. Basically you can have a mix of KDE, Gnome, Gtk, WXWindow and other apps. Now try saving or opening a file in each of those. All will come with a differente file dialog. The file dialog should be a task of the desktop environment, not the application. If you give openoffice, kate and gedit for a newbie, he will have a lot of problems figuring how each file dialog works and why they are so different. :-P


Windows isn't any different. MS Office has a custom open/save dialog (albeit not significantly different) to the standard NT5+ dialog. Old 16bit applications will use the old Windows 3.x dialog (remember the font dialog in Vista ;) ) and countless other applications don't even bother to use a Windows API, instead choosing to code their own open/save dialog.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Agreed in part
by protomank on Mon 4th Aug 2008 18:22 in reply to "RE: Agreed in part"
protomank Member since:
2006-08-03

Yes, windows has differences, but for the sake of everybody sanity - the differences are FAR less than KDE and gnome. Just because windows does it wrong, we all should be happy with it??

As I've said before, the solution is actually simple: let the DE deal with it. There is even a working solution for KDE using open dialog in gtk/gnome files, so no need for a dictator.

Edited 2008-08-04 18:25 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Agreed in part
by hobgoblin on Mon 4th Aug 2008 15:42 in reply to "Agreed in part"
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

consistency requires a dictator...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Agreed in part
by abraxas on Mon 4th Aug 2008 15:48 in reply to "Agreed in part"
abraxas Member since:
2005-07-07

Overall, I do not see much problems, but there is one BIG that is never fulfilled: consistency.
Basically you can have a mix of KDE, Gnome, Gtk, WXWindow and other apps. Now try saving or opening a file in each of those. All will come with a differente file dialog. The file dialog should be a task of the desktop environment, not the application.
If you give openoffice, kate and gedit for a newbie, he will have a lot of problems figuring how each file dialog works and why they are so different. :-P


I have to argue this everytime I hear it because it is crap. Windows has the most inconsistent interface among desktop operating systems. First of all Windows provides very few built in application compared to either OSX or any standard Linux deskotp OS. Third party apps use their own toolkit, widgets, icons, interface, etc. Even Microsoft's own applicaions differ greatly from each other. Compare that to a GNOME distro with strict Human Interface Guidelines, standard icons that are often used even outside GNOME specific apps, and only two commonly used toolkits. There is definitly less interface variance on a standard GNOME desktop then there is with a standard Windows one.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Agreed in part
by rockwell on Mon 4th Aug 2008 16:34 in reply to "RE: Agreed in part"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

//Even Microsoft's own applicaions differ greatly from each other. //

Especially in, say, Office 2007.

/sarcasm.

Please provide proof of your idiotic tripe.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Agreed in part
by WorknMan on Mon 4th Aug 2008 18:43 in reply to "RE: Agreed in part"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

I have to argue this everytime I hear it because it is crap. Windows has the most inconsistent interface among desktop operating systems. First of all Windows provides very few built in application compared to either OSX or any standard Linux deskotp OS. Third party apps use their own toolkit, widgets, icons, interface, etc. Even Microsoft's own applicaions differ greatly from each other. Compare that to a GNOME distro with strict Human Interface Guidelines, standard icons that are often used even outside GNOME specific apps, and only two commonly used toolkits. There is definitly less interface variance on a standard GNOME desktop then there is with a standard Windows one.

Reply Parent Score: 2